1. The remaining Defendants, except Defendant R, and the Intervenor W who acquired by Defendant R, shall be not less than 18,778 square meters of X-based forest land in Chungcheongnam-si.

1. The facts alleged by the Plaintiff as the cause of the instant claim are deemed to have been led to confessions by either a dispute between the parties or by failing to submit a written response.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding that the Defendants except the Plaintiffs and Defendant E (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) filed a claim against the Plaintiff and the Intervenor acquiring the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”), the Defendants, other than the Plaintiffs and Defendant E, agreed to separately own the part specified as the location and the size of 18,778m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) from the Defendant E, with the intention to separately own the part specified as the location and the size, and to separately own the part specified as the location and the size in the instant land for convenience. As such, it is reasonable to view that there exists a sectionally owned co-ownership relationship under a mutual title trust with respect to each of the parts listed in paragraph (1) through 595m2 (iv) of the disposition purchased by the Plaintiffs by specifying the location and size of the instant land.

Therefore, with respect to the dispute in this case among the land in this case, the defendant et al. is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the termination of mutual title trust between the plaintiffs on November 27, 2019 with respect to each corresponding share in the attached Table.

B. On February 2, 2018, when the instant lawsuit against Defendant R among the instant land claim against Defendant R, the fact that the ownership transfer registration was completed in the W on February 2, 2018, while the instant lawsuit against Defendant R was pending, is no dispute between the parties.

Therefore, without any need to examine further, the Plaintiff’s claim based on the premise that Defendant R is in a sectionally owned co-ownership relationship with respect to the instant land by mutual title trust.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant et al. is justified. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant et al. is justified.